Patent Licence-Infringement e.g. Acacia Media and the effect on our industry

[leedsfan]

After reading numerous articles, through various personal research it seems to me that we are entering a very risky time for our industry.

Case in Point- Acacia Media- who are going after the adult indutry, as they have admitted themselves, before hitting microsoft and Aol, because we are soft targets and will provide legal precedence to beef up their legal position, ready to tackle the big boys.

It is painfully obvious that as an industry, unless we all stand together, Acacia has the financial means to divide and conquer. They have been buying up patents, quietly over the last few years, with the foresight of massive legal claims against eveyone using streaming media. Whilst this may seem ludicrous, they seem to have a very solid platform of patents to back their claims.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-983552.html?tag=mainstry

If we are to look at the bigger picture here, it seems that many companies have been buidling banks of patent licences, with the express purpose of claiming royalties from everyone using their products (be it streaming video/audio/frames etc).

Even "frames" on your browser, are now being claimed as patented, giving rise to a potential state of anarchy, where everything we use on the internet, will be up for grabs, and claimed as proprietary software, eventually.

Where does this leave us as an industry??

In my opinion, extremely vulnerable, given societies already disgruntled view of the industry itself.

(As I am writing this rant, I'm wondering if someone will try and sue me for using their font...!!)

What are some of your reactions to how things will pan out regarding patents, and specifically what Acacia's suit might do to our industry?

[shadow]

my first reaction is fuck them..then i went and read more and this could be a mess..

[Feynman]

There is NOTHING new under the sun...

Complete articles at http://www.dfeynman.com/misc/Marconi.rtf

New York Times
December 15, 1901

Wireless Signals
Across the Ocean

St. John's N.F. -- Guglielmo Marconi announced tonight the most wonderful scientific development of recent times. He stated that he had received electric signals across the Atlantic Ocean from his station in Comwall, England.


New York Times
December 17,1901

May Sue Signor Marconi

Anglo-American Telegraph Company Serves Papers on Him:
It Says He is Violating Its Monopoly of the Telegraph Business of
Newfoundland

St. John's N.F., Dec. 16 -- returning here from Cape Spear today Signor Marconi was served with legal documents from the solicitors of the Anglo-Amer*ican Telegraph Company.

These notify him that the company possesses a monopoly of the telegraph business within Newfoundland and its dependencies, and demand that he cease his experiments and remove his apparatus forthwith, else the company will apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction restraining him from further trials.

Signor Marconi has not yet decided as to what course he will take in this matter. He regards the action of the Anglo-American Telegraph Company as the best proof of the importance of his new successful experiments.

When Signor Marconi was at Cape Spear, the newspaper report that Mr. Edison discredited the announcement of signals having been received here last week from Cornwall was telephoned to him. He replied that the signals were received by himself, and that they were absolutely genuine.

[leedsfan]

So yes, Feyman, it's nothing new.

But it doesn't really answer my question does it?

[StuartD]

The phone was invented by Bell... great invention. Everyone put it into use.... eventually... someone started charging to use the lines.

And then, eventually.... they decided that it was best to only charge for "long distance" calls... the ones that started breaking city lines and stuff.

However, in England... you still have to pay for local calls.

Why?

It's just a service... it's just something that everyone has used... it's a way of communicating. Why should anyone have to pay for something that wasn't invented by them in the first place?

Anyway... my point? Can you not see where I'm going with this?
It sucks... but it does happen in areas other than the internet. Will they be using situations like this to strengthen their own case?

This isn't something that can just be dismissed... and say "they just can't, don't worry."

just the idea alone that they're going after "soft targets" first... shows me that they have some smarts. They've been building up to this for some 10 years now... or something, lots anyway.

They're not just some flash in the pan, like those hyperlink people were (remember them? Tried to copyright hyperlinks!)

That's my take.

[Feynman]

Originally posted by leedsfan
What are some of your reactions to how things will pan out regarding patents, and specifically what Acacia's suit might do to our industry?

The old patent system is becoming more troublesome than not in certain fields of business. When years of research are required, patents are a good thing. But when somebody patents every darn ideas they have, it's patent-squatting. Patenting of code and virtual property is finicky.

An example is the RSA encryption algorigthm patent. You could not buy for business the RSA library unless you paid them royalties. Everybody that used PGP outside of the USA used their libraries because they were patented only in the USA. In the US, PGP was re-written to circumvent the RSA patents.

The patent system was intended to protect the inventors of a device or idea, but the idea had to be non-obvious.

In practice, if royalties are demanded on what used to be used by everybody, many hackers will make the life of patented software impossible to live.

More legally, the patenting of certain technologies would not stop the use of these technologies. Either have the licence issuing companies keep a very low price or see the users companies go out of the country in jurisdictions that makes it difficult to sue.

Due to location-irrelevance of most internet businesses, they will have a hard time enforcing the patents... Methink it's a bunch of gullible shiny eyes sharks that are pumped up by lawyers. Lawyers are very well the only ones that will ever profit from that.
BTW, there is one prosecution from which judges and lawyers are not immune: public nuisance by abuse of the legal system.

Out of stringent policing, lawless situation has very good chances of emerging. In the long run, many people will re-discover the law of unintended consequences, methink...

[Feynman]

Originally posted by StuartD
The phone was invented by Bell... great invention. Everyone put it into use.... eventually... someone started charging to use the lines.

And then, eventually.... they decided that it was best to only charge for "long distance" calls... the ones that started breaking city lines and stuff.

However, in England... you still have to pay for local calls.

Why?

It's just a service... it's just something that everyone has used... it's a way of communicating. Why should anyone have to pay for something that wasn't invented by them in the first place?

That's my take.


You should pay for the efforts of somebody else. Phone lines don't grow up by themselves in the middle of the night. And they require maintenance.

Local calls were subsidized for a long time by long distance calls. There is always the base service fee. Because of the govt-granted monopoly, phone companies decided to heavily have the long distance service subsidize the local services. But all of that was intra-corporate cash-flow management. Now, with the de-regulation (i.e. removing the monopoly of a few companies), long distance phone calls went to their normal market-forces price and the local service saw an increase in price. It used to cost me 65 cents per minute for calls in France. Now, I pay 9 cents per minute for a call to France.

On my commercial line, I pay 35 cents for each slices of 10 minutes.

[Bestat]

This is a real threat not only to the adult community, but to thousands of other businesses, such as pay per view, movies in your room, etc.

The adult industry is taking a stand, Far-L from Homegrown video is the communication person about Acacia and he has posted that anyone with questions or concerns should contact him at 206-524-4540. I would suggest anyone that has received Acacia's little "love" packet, contact Far-L first.

:cool:

[Darin]

Boys with big balls and patents end up dead in a gutter.

[Platinum Dave]

This company is not that stable a company as they seem.

They are a 40 cent Nasdaq stock with zero volume being traded.
- to me that shows this company is about to be delisted it cant even maintain their stock on the listed exchanges.

This company is doing a shot gun approach across the entire adult industry. Send anyone a package saying you have to pay this because you are streaming video.

We got two packages, what the fuck? Why two? because they are just sending it to anyone.

the adult industry actually does have alot of money, they think we are weak, but many companies in this industry have pleanty of money to defend themself. And with the combined efforts which is what is going on now, good luck to them getting this passed in the courts.

I dont see this as a threat to our industry. Maybe certain companies may have to may some money, but not a threat. I think going forward perhaps they will be able to collect money from their patents on certain companies but not collect for the last so many years.

Thats my two cents from my very limited early knowledge on this situation.

[D.Minion]

I haven't done anything to research this at all.

I understand what is being portrayed by all of you.

But there is no way they can sue you for streaming video unless they
can prove that you cracked their source code to stream your videos.

And to do that they would need to rake all your servers.

The man power alone to do that would cost more time and money along with headaches than anything else.

Streaming sound and video is open source protocol unless you go through
a third party company like Real Media [TM.]

Anyway i'mna delve into this a little more and bring up a valid structure and solid grounds for their argument [ if they really have one].

=FREEDOM=

[D.Minion]

"All patents can be challenged," Belgard said. "I think there are many Internet patents that can and should be challenged and invalidated."

hmmm . . . .

=::FREEDOM::=

[leedsfan]

D. MinionI haven't done anything to research this at all.

Check out the article, and you will see the the patents they have lined up cover the basic streaming media design, and that microsoft; for example, who deliver this through windows media player, are directly liable for using their technology.

We are the first in line to be recognised as using this technlogy, without their consent, because then they can have some positive test cases (and who is more likely to win, the adult industry, or a technlology company, who have carefully prepared for this, with a heavy legal team funded by millions and millions of dollars, backed by several years of research).

Once they are done raping the adult industry for all its worth, they plan on moving in on microsft, and aol, then home movie channels, and in-room entertainment....the list goes on and on. The more cases they win (and dont forget that Virgin Megastores-aka Richard Branson enterprises have decided to pay instead of go to court, after extensive research by their team of legal experts), the more money they have t fuel the next case...and so the dominoes fall. THAT IS THEIR STRATEGY, and anyone thinking this is a flash in the pan, unimportant story, think again. I believe that there is at least a 50% likelihood we will be paying 2-5% royalties on all streaming media, patented by Acacia Media, within 2 years. Thats lots of $$$

[Feynman]

Originally posted by leedsfan
D. Minion

(and dont forget that Virgin Megastores-aka Richard Branson enterprises have decided to pay instead of go to court, after extensive research by their team of legal experts)

It might be for reasons entirely other than because the likelihood of winning in court is low. Branson has an image to maintain, and going against these patent claims can be counterproductive for him, even if he's likely to win. Consider this: 3 to 5% is, in a certain sense, not a lot. A negative corporate image might cost more than Acadia's fee in terms of lost sales.

Do you know *for sure* the reason why Branson doesn't fight it ?

If, as Pt Dave says, Acacia is about to be delisted, they might try any stunt to stay alive. I think the share value has to remain over one dollar for NASDAQ to keep you. But again, I am utterly ignorant of stock market.

Where are the stock brokers when we need them ?

Any stunt cock moonlighting as a stockbroker and investment advisor around here ?

:D :D :D

[Feynman]

Everybody be notified.

I've registered several new patents.

Among them, I've patented the comma and the period ( "," and ".")

I'll charge 0.01 cents (USD) per use.

I'll send you my Bahamas bank account number soon...

In the meantime, the use of commas and periods are on special: two for one.

:D

[leedsfan]

Do you know *for sure* the reason why Branson doesn't fight it ?

Branson's team of lawyers advised him that fighting Acacia would cost more than paying royalties, with the very strong likelihood that he would lose.

NOw, don't you think that he mgiht have a few $$$ to fight, if he thought he had even a 50/50% case???

He knew he would lose, and it would cost him massive $$$, so he paid.

The stock price of Acacia has absolutely nothing to do with this campaign.

Acacia Media is owned (as far as I can ascertain through research) by old American money, which means that political clout can be forced to bear upon us, through different mediums, not related to this case, but damaging to our industry in a time requiring stability, from our peers.

End result, we get the shaft, thet get our money.